WSJ Blog Readers to Obama: First, Fix the Economy

The totally unscientific results of yesterday’s poll are in: If Obama wins the election, he should work to stabilize the economy before pushing to overhaul health insurance or create cap-and-trade system for greenhouse-gas emissions.

The poll — the first-ever joint effort between the Health Blog and WSJ’s Environmental Capital blog — followed a WSJ story that looked at how the nation’s economic woes could affect Obama’s economic policy agenda. In the end, with more than 300 votes cast, our readers overwhelmingly favored stabilizing the economy before moving on to other issues:

Comments (5 of 5)

It's pretty interesing that that the Poll used the phrase "Climate Change REGULATION" as a choice and it still got a hefty 27%. We all know WSJ readers break out in hives when they see the word regulation. You could have similarily used the phrase "MASSIVE Carbon TAX"

As an alternative, what if the choice in the poll was "Dramatically Decrease Oil Dependency (with a decrease in the trade deficit and middle east tensions), Create Jobs with Green Economy Investment, Invest in the Alternative Energy Future and Save the Climate!" I'd vote for that! The title would not fit nicely in the poll, but it would reflect the many potential multiple benefits of the green economy.

11:56 am August 27, 2008

Mark Hayes wrote :

These three issues are much too important to be addressed sequentially. Work must start on all three immediately. "Fixing" the economy is not something a president can do quickly anyway.

10:12 am August 27, 2008

Boom2Bust.com wrote :

From Paul Craig Roberts, the "Father of Reaganomics":

"Superpower America is a ship of fools in denial of their plight. While offshoring kills American economic prospects, 'free-market economists' sing its praises. While war imposes enormous costs on a bankrupt country, neoconservatives call for more war and Republicans and Democrats appropriate war funds, abroad...

We have arrived at the point where it is no longer bold to say that nothing now can be done. Unless the rest of the world decides to underwrite our economic rescue, the chips will fall where they may."

1. What is the point of writing a story about a "poll" that even you acknowledge isn't credible at all?
2. The poll itself is a complete false dilemma, as it assumes that the economy is uncoupled from both health care costs and climate costs.

This site is going down hill, fast.

9:57 am August 27, 2008

Wisco wrote :

Why are these separated out like this? Transitioning off fossil fuels would remove a major drag on our economy (the massive amounts of energy we import and their ever-growing cost). Providing health care to all unlocks the shackles that keep people stuck in jobs they hate or prevents them from starting their own businesses or taking on employees. Deal with energy and health care, and the economy resolves itself.

About Environmental Capital

Environmental Capital provides daily news and analysis of the shifting energy and environmental landscape. The Wall Street Journal’s Keith Johnson is the lead writer. Environmental Capital is led by Journal energy reporter Russell Gold, and includes contributions from other writers at the Journal, WSJ.com, and Dow Jones Newswires. Write us at environmentalcapital@wsj.com.